DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims are directed to a signal per se (as disclosed by Applicant’s Specification, Para 99) for use in transmitting instructions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Alexander Louie et al., WO 2023/091393 A1.
Independent claim 1, Louie discloses a method for sharing spatial data between co-located artificial reality systems, the method comprising:
obtaining, by a second artificial reality system, a space identifier for a space in a real-world environment (i.e. a first artificial-reality device may receive a notification, e.g. space identifier, that a shared space generated by a second artificial-reality device is shared with the first artificial-reality device – Para 42);
transmitting a query for the spatial data for the space using the space identifier (i.e. A device may periodically send its localization position to the server; upon entering a geographic region, it may request a portion of the 3D map from the server (e.g., the device may query for a portion of the 3D map based on GPS location, WiFi positioning, etc.). Thereafter, the device may compare the descriptors of physical objects detected by the device’s sensors to the descriptors in the 3D map to estimate the location of the device within the 3D map – Para 78);
obtaining, in response to the query, the spatial data for the space corresponding to the space identifier (i.e. At step 850, the server 102 sends a notification to the receiving devices 103 in response to determining that the parameters are satisfied (the parameters may also include determining that the receiving device is authorized to see the shared virtual object and/or access to the shared space itself). – Para 78; the receiving device 103 accesses descriptors of one or more physical objects and a spatial -relationship definition between the physical object and the shared space from the server 102. The physical object acts as an anchor for the shared space. – Para 79),
wherein the spatial data includes one or more spatial anchors established for the space by a first artificial reality system, the one or more spatial anchors each defining a respective location in the space (i.e. an example of co-located sharing of a shared space, or the sharing of items in a shared space between two co-located devices; The shared space 155 may be located on or anchored to a physical object 150 – Para 49; Fig. 3), and
wherein at least one of the one or more spatial anchors has corresponding scene data associated with one or more physical objects, the scene data providing an identified object type from a set of object types defined as scene components, in the space, with reference to the one or more locations in the space (i.e. The physical object acts as an anchor for the shared space. – Para 79; accessing descriptors of a physical object on the receiving side that can be used as an anchor to a receiver-side shared space and a definition of the spatial relationship between the physical object and the receiver-side shared space – Para 84);
aligning one or more features of the space, captured by the second artificial reality system, with some of the one or more spatial anchors (i.e. the server 102 may maintain a 3D map of the environment and use the features associated with the shared space to anchor the shared space in the 3D map – Para 77); and
rendering one or more virtual objects with respect to the one or more physical objects in the space using the scene data associated with the at least one of the one or more spatial anchors (i.e. The devices of other users who are receiving objects from the user of the sending device may determine a suitable surface to display the objects according to the label; The sending device may send instructions to a server to send rendering instructions to one or more selected other devices. – Para 71).
Claim 2, Louie discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the scene data was gathered by the first artificial reality system (i.e. The user may define a shared space 011 on his kitchen table – Para 48; Fig. 2).
Claim 3 Louie discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the object type is identified by performing object recognition on one or more images of the space captured by the first artificial reality system (i.e. the operating system uses real world localization to determine that a physical object or space is equivalent to a physical object or space that has previously been labeled or used. The system may recognize where a device is located in the real world, given the proper permissions, so that when a virtual object is attached to a real- world object, the system stores the physical location in a map so that, from a user perspective, the virtual object appears to be attached to the real -world item. – Para 70).
Claim 4, Louie discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the object type is identified based on input from a user of the first artificial reality system (i.e. a person wishes to share all the contents of the person’s desk or refrigerator. In some embodiments, a user may label the surface by type, such as refrigerator, wall, or desk. – Para 70).
Claim 5, Louie discloses the method of claim 1, wherein, based on the aligning of the one or more features of the space, rendering the one or more virtual objects in the space is from a perspective of the second artificial reality system instead of the first artificial reality system (i.e. The presentation of the shared virtual objects 130, 135 within the receiver-side shared space 125 is not symmetrical to those in the sender-side shared space 115 like in FIG. 4. Instead, the virtual objects 130, 135 are rearranged automatically to present a similar picture to the user of the receiving device 103 as the one seen by the user of the sending device 101. – Para 51).
Claim 6, Louie discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: obtaining the scene data based on the association between the at least one of the one or more spatial anchors and the scene data (i.e. accessing descriptors of a physical object on the receiving side that can be used as an anchor to a receiver-side shared space and a definition of the spatial relationship between the physical object and the receiver-side shared space – Para 84).
Claim 7, Louie discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the one or more virtual objects are rendered in a same position and orientation in the space by the first artificial reality system and the second artificial reality system (i.e. remote sharing of a shared space between remote users; The shared space 011 may be used by the users to synchronously share content – Para 48).
Claim 8, Louie discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the space identifier is obtained from a common artificial reality application executing on the first artificial reality system and the second artificial reality system (i.e. Sharing of virtual objects between devices may be done natively through an operating system rather than requiring the two users to enter the same or similar applications to share the virtual objects. One roadblock to seamless sharing of digital objects using traditional method is the need to run specific applications on both the sending and receiving devices. In an embodiment, an operating system may be configured to provide a central platform that manages sharing between users of different devices. This operating system may serve as a host for storing and encapsulating any content from any application in a virtual object or an augment. – Para 40).
Claim 9, Louie discloses the method of claim 8, wherein the artificial reality application shares the space identifier with the second artificial reality system based on a same session identifier assigned to the first artificial reality system and the second artificial reality system (i.e. the server 102 identifies virtual reality devices in an around the shared space that meet pre-determined parameters for location and authorization. – Para 78; the receiving device 103 identifies the shared space using a combination of sensors and maps along with the instructions from the server. Specifically, at step 870, the receiving device 103 accesses descriptors of one or more physical objects and a spatial -relationship definition between the physical object and the shared space from the server 102. – Para 79).
Claim 10, Louie discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the space identifier is obtained from the first artificial reality system (i.e. a first artificial-reality device may receive a notification that a shared space generated by a second artificial-reality device is shared with the first artificial-reality device – Para 42).
Claim 11, Louie discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the first artificial reality system shares the space identifier with the second artificial reality system based on a social graph associated with a user of the second artificial reality system (i.e. These users may be identified as anyone who has a compatible device, anyone who falls within a certain category such as friends, or a specific individual identified by the user of the sending device 101. – Para 49).
Claim 12, Louie discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the space identifier is obtained based on one or more permissions established for the spatial data by the first artificial reality system (i.e. In some embodiments, the notification may simply be the presentation of the virtual objects 130, 135 in the shared space 155 if the user of the receiving device 103 has previously granted permission to see whatever is placed in the shared space 155. This permission may be granted to specific individuals, identified groups, or the general public. – Para 49).
Claim 13, Louie discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the query is transmitted to a remote computing system associated with a platform of the second artificial reality system (i.e. Sharing of virtual objects between devices may be done natively through an operating system… In an embodiment, an operating system may be configured to provide a central platform that manages sharing between users of different devices. This operating system may serve as a host for storing and encapsulating any content from any application in a virtual object or an augment. – Para 40; the device may query for a portion of the 3D map based on GPS location, WiFi positioning, etc.). Thereafter, the device may compare the descriptors of physical objects detected by the device’s sensors to the descriptors in the 3D map to estimate the location of the device within the 3D map – Para 78).
Independent claim 14, the claim is similar in scope to claim 1. Therefore, similar rationale as applied in the rejection of claim 1 applies herein.
Claim 15, Louie discloses the computer-readable storage medium of claim 14, wherein the artificial reality system is a second artificial reality system, and wherein the one or more spatial anchors were established for the space by a first artificial reality system (i.e. an example of co-located sharing of a shared space, or the sharing of items in a shared space between two co-located devices; The shared space 155 may be located on or anchored to a physical object 150 – Para 49; Fig. 3).
Claim 16, the corresponding rationale as applied in the rejection of claim 2 applies herein.
Claim 17, Louie discloses the computer-readable storage medium of claim 14, wherein the scene data provides an identified object type from a set of object types defined as scene components, in the space, with reference to the one or more locations in the space (i.e. The physical object acts as an anchor for the shared space. – Para 79; accessing descriptors of a physical object on the receiving side that can be used as an anchor to a receiver-side shared space and a definition of the spatial relationship between the physical object and the receiver-side shared space – Para 84).
Independent claim 18, the claim is similar in scope to claim 1. Therefore, similar rationale as applied in the rejection of claim 1 applies herein.
Claim 19, the corresponding rationale as applied in the rejection of claims 8 or 9 apply herein. Additionally, Louie discloses wherein the second artificial reality system is co-located with the first artificial reality system (i.e. the artificial-reality devices are co-located – Para 69).
Claim 20, the corresponding rationale as applied in the rejection of claim 10 applies herein.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHANTE HARRISON whose telephone number is (571)272-7659. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am to 5:00 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alicia Harrington can be reached at 571-272-2330. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHANTE E HARRISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2615
Prosecution Insights